https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
--- Comment #67 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The binutils-2_34-branch branch has been updated by H.J. Lu
:
https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=23820109ced73d231b69ea6fa9a85b743d7843c8
commit 23820109ced73d231
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
--- Comment #66 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The master branch has been updated by H.J. Lu :
https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=3d98c46092341c1373d960d0a66ca502d5b7ee7f
commit 3d98c46092341c1373d960d0a66ca50
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
--- Comment #65 from Martin Liška ---
>
> Please open a new bug.
Sure:
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25584
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://sourceware.org/bugz
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
--- Comment #64 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #63)
> I have one more question about the lto-wrapper usage: is there any reason
> why 'ar' and 'ranlib' also use it? It makes building of some packages
> significantly sl
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
--- Comment #63 from Martin Liška ---
I have one more question about the lto-wrapper usage: is there any reason why
'ar' and 'ranlib' also use it? It makes building of some packages significantly
slower.
--
You are receiving this mail becaus
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
--- Comment #62 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The binutils-2_34-branch branch has been updated by H.J. Lu
:
https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=e2b46ba142d9901897d8189422f0bcc28e5660b8
commit e2b46ba142d990189
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
--- Comment #60 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #59)
> Fixed on master branch.
Good. Please pull the revision to the 2.34 branch.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|NEW
--- Comment #59 from H.J. Lu ---
Fixed
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
--- Comment #58 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The master branch has been updated by H.J. Lu :
https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=dcf06b89b9129da6988878a77afdd02d3acc2e30
commit dcf06b89b9129da6988878a77afdd02
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
--- Comment #57 from Martin Liška ---
> Try the latest one.
I can confirm it works.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
--- Comment #56 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #48)
> Ok, I've just packaged the 2.34 release branch with the backport of this
> issue.
> However, I see the following Invalid free:
>
> $ touch a.c && gcc -c -flto a.c
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #12287|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
--- Comment #54 from Martin Liška ---
However, I see one another segfault:
$ cat 1.i
int a;
$ cat 2.i
[empty file]
$ gcc -flto=auto -O2 -fPIC 1.i -c
$ gcc -flto=auto -O2 -fPIC 2.i -c
$ ar cru x.a 1.o 2.o
$ ranlib x.a
Segmentation fault (core
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
--- Comment #53 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #52)
> Created attachment 12297 [details]
> A new patch
The patch works for me! Thank you.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #12296|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
--- Comment #51 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #49)
> If I revert backport of 99845b3b77ed1248b6fb94707f88868bde358ccc, then it's
> fine.
Please try the new patch.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
--- Comment #50 from H.J. Lu ---
Created attachment 12296
--> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12296&action=edit
A patch
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
--- Comment #49 from Martin Liška ---
If I revert backport of 99845b3b77ed1248b6fb94707f88868bde358ccc, then it's
fine.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
--- Comment #47 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The binutils-2_34-branch branch has been updated by Nick Clifton
:
https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=804b7fd4fdc545a6ed18aee3d4186574861634ef
commit 804b7fd4fdc5
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
--- Comment #46 from Nick Clifton ---
(In reply to Romain Geissler from comment #45)
> @Nick, are you ok to cherry-pick commits from branch
> users/hjl/pr25355/binutils-2_34-branch in the official 2.34 branch ?
Yes - I will look into it soon.
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
--- Comment #45 from Romain Geissler ---
@Nick, are you ok to cherry-pick commits from branch
users/hjl/pr25355/binutils-2_34-branch in the official 2.34 branch ?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
--- Comment #44 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Romain Geissler from comment #43)
> Hi,
>
> Would it be possible to backport the commits required by this bug in the
> branch 2.34 that was just released ? That would allow the upcoming gcc 10
> (
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
Romain Geissler changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||romain.geissler at amadeus dot
com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
--- Comment #42 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #39)
> >
> > What is wrong to use the matching lto-wrapper for the plugin being used?
>
> It's probably fine. I'm just wondering how to use a locally install GCC to
> co
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
--- Comment #40 from Martin Liška ---
I will have to start using AR=gcc-ar, ...
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
--- Comment #39 from Martin Liška ---
>
> What is wrong to use the matching lto-wrapper for the plugin being used?
It's probably fine. I'm just wondering how to use a locally install GCC to
cooperate fine with binutils.
--
You are receivin
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
--- Comment #38 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #37)
> >
> > Which liblto_plugin.so did nm load? Which liblto_plugin.so should nm load?
>
> It loads the following plugin:
>
> stat("/usr/bin/../lib64/bfd-plugins", 0x7
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
--- Comment #37 from Martin Liška ---
>
> Which liblto_plugin.so did nm load? Which liblto_plugin.so should nm load?
It loads the following plugin:
stat("/usr/bin/../lib64/bfd-plugins", 0x7fffd980) = -1 ENOENT (No such file
or directory
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|WAITING
--- Comment #36 from H.J. Lu ---
(
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
--- Comment #34 from Martin Liška ---
I have one more question. It's a quite common case for me that that I do
testing of the built GCC :
$ export PATH=/home/marxin/bin/gcc/bin/:$PATH && export
LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/home/marxin/bin/gcc/lib64/:$LD_
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
--- Comment #33 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The master branch has been updated by H.J. Lu :
https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=22fe7df8c964c23f5760ecf9653af86ede8b5030
commit 22fe7df8c964c23f5760ecf9653af86
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
--- Comment #31 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #30)
> Created attachment 12287 [details]
> Try this
I can confirm that patch works.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
--- Comment #30 from H.J. Lu ---
Created attachment 12287
--> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12287&action=edit
Try this
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|WORKSFORME
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
--- Comment #27 from Martin Liška ---
>
> Works for me on master branch. Please try master branch to see if
> it works for you.
It looks one needs a system setup to have multiple plug-in which cause that:
$ ls /usr/bin/../bin/../lib/bfd-pl
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
--- Comment #28 from Martin Liška ---
Created attachment 12286
--> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12286&action=edit
libiberty archive
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
--- Comment #26 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #25)
> (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #24)
> > Ok, I've got one another problem with the 2 commits
> > (de66c68d899600286b0d054508a2ed7beee64870 and
> > 39f2b43be6ccc3a
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
--- Comment #25 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #24)
> Ok, I've got one another problem with the 2 commits
> (de66c68d899600286b0d054508a2ed7beee64870 and
> 39f2b43be6ccc3acb29ab84dee48180b6a8fcba5) applied on top of th
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
--- Comment #24 from Martin Liška ---
Ok, I've got one another problem with the 2 commits
(de66c68d899600286b0d054508a2ed7beee64870 and
39f2b43be6ccc3acb29ab84dee48180b6a8fcba5) applied on top of the bintuils 2.34
release. I built a openSUSE p
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
--- Comment #23 from Martin Liška ---
>
> It looks like you were using one of my old patches. Line 860 in plugin.c
> doesn't do anything on master branch.
You are right, sorry for the noise.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
--- Comment #22 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #19)
> Thank you H.J. but I see the following memory corruption with the patch
> applied:
>
> $ valgrind ~/bin/binutils/bin/nm --plugin
> /usr/bin/../bin/../lib/bfd-plugi
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|WAITING
--- Comment #21 from H.J. Lu ---
(
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
--- Comment #20 from Martin Liška ---
Created attachment 12283
--> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12283&action=edit
valgrind log file
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
--- Comment #17 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The master branch has been updated by H.J. Lu :
https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=0aa99dcd70bce68f8efef310350a6294e1143382
commit 0aa99dcd70bce68f8efef310350a629
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #12277|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||https://sourceware.org/ml/b
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
--- Comment #15 from Martin Liška ---
Thank you H.J. I can confirm the patch works:
Before:
$ cat x.c
int nm_test_var;
int nm_test_var2 = 1234;
extern int foo (void);
int
main ()
{
return foo ();
}
$ gcc-9 -fno-common x.c -c -flto && nm
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
--- Comment #14 from H.J. Lu ---
Created attachment 12277
--> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12277&action=edit
A patch
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
--- Comment #13 from Sergei Trofimovich ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #12)
> It is independent of -fno-common:
>
>
> [hjl@gnu-cfl-2 pr25355]$ cat x.c
> int nm_test_var = 30;
>
> extern int foo (void);
>
> int
> main ()
> {
> retu
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25355
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
59 matches
Mail list logo
